History will note this day as a major advance for civil rights, freedom and justice.

8:00 pm May 9, 2012

Anonymous wrote:

Depends on who you ask.

8:44 pm May 9, 2012

Anonymous wrote:

"Depends on who you ask."

Try virtually anyone under the age of 30.

8:41 am May 10, 2012

SLC wrote:

As an expression of tolerance and inclusiveness, I have no problem. This is especially true if one accepts the premise that gays are "made" that way. But then there is the aggressive position that monogomous relationships are an expression of preference, perhaps preference of the moment, and that gender distinctions are reflections of past, outdated and tired cultural distinctions that have been imposed on free-thinking individuals. The big issue is whether the pendulum will continue to swing to the point that any institutional support, or cultural support, or even individual support for heterosexual marriage will be challenged as making same-sex couples "uncomfortable" as has happened with expressions of religion. The risk to foundations of our culture by outlawing traditions should not be underestimated.

10:19 am May 10, 2012

denise wrote:

Liberal anonymous....virtually anyone under the age of 30 ? First I catch you speaking for the whole country in the W VA post, now I catch you stretching the truth.

Even if it is 6 out of 10....is that "virtually anyone" ???? No.
Stop exaggerating.

10:24 am May 10, 2012

denise wrote:

I will ask what some others have asked.
Bisexuals and bigamists would not be equall and have the same freedoms.....so, could I marry a man and a woman, or could a man have 4 wives ? Hmmm.....could I have 3 husbands ??
Freedom for "everyone" will be the new issue, as we sink the can-opener into the worm can.

Will those rules be changed too, in the name of equality?

11:38 am May 10, 2012

Jim wrote:

Here is one of few issues on which I count myself a conservative. A man can have a wife; he cannot be a wife. Ditto a woman being a "husband." While I don't believe homosexuals are sinners or any such nonsense (God doesn't play such tricks), marriage is between a man and woman. I do think there is a hint of spite among gays on this issue, that not only are they being married like heterosexuals, they are even taking the titles of heterosexual marriage. It strains the definition of marriage, of husband and wife. Obama really had no choice, and I wouldn't be surprised if Romney flipped on this issue too. But it makes me queasy.

6:39 pm May 10, 2012

JC wrote:

You Americans really need to move on. What a pathetic and insignicant issue to be squabbling about in the 21st century. What a laughable society you have there.

Add a Comment

Error message

Name

We welcome thoughtful comments from readers. Please comply with our guidelines. Our blogs do not require the use of your real name.

About Washington Wire

Washington Wire is one of the oldest standing features in American journalism. Since the Wire launched on Sept. 20, 1940, the Journal has offered readers an informal look at the capital. Now online, the Wire provides a succession of glimpses at what’s happening behind hot stories and warnings of what to watch for in the days ahead. The Wire is led by Reid J. Epstein, with contributions from the rest of the bureau. Washington Wire now also includes Think Tank, our home for outside analysis from policy and political thinkers.